Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Each MARLOG conference has its own theme which differs from a year to other. However, the main scope the conference is maritime transport and logistics. The journal presents research articles, case studies and reviews focusing on all aspects of the international maritime transport and business logistics and any other related fields. MARLOG journal accepts a high quality contributions from both aspects; academic and professional. All articles submitted to MARLOG are a subject of peer-review by the technical committee of each conference, in addition to the permanent editorial board of the journal.

Subject areas suitable for publication include, but are not limited to the following fields:
• Maritime transport
• Business logistics
• Maritime transport economics
• Supply chain management
• Sustainable development
• Digital transformation in maritime transport and logistics


Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

All articles published in MARLOG journal are a subject of double blind peer-review by the technical committee of each conference, in addition to the permanent editorial board of the journal. The process of peer-review begins by requesting the abstracts from the authors (simple one page abstract) before a certain deadline, then these abstracts are reviewed by members of the technical committee. Abstract notifications are then sent to authors requesting the full paper from the accepted ones. 

The following requested from the authors when uploading the full research papers:

1-      Uploading them before a certain deadline

2-      Remove all the names, affiliations and contact data from the paper to apply the double-blind review system.

3-      Follow the conference template strictly.


After the deadline, all papers are desk reviewed first then they go through a plagiarism check (Maximum accepted plagiarism rate is 20%) Then all papers are sent to minimum two or three reviewers for peer-review.


After receiving the reviewers’ feedback and approved by the head of the technical committee and chief in editor of the journal, these reviews are sent to the authors along with the decisions as follows:

1- Accepted

2- Accepted with comments

3- Rejected.


For both option 1 and 2, the authors are requested to re upload the papers after adding the names, affiliations and contact data to the paper and making sure they follow the template correctly.


Publication Frequency

This journal is published once per year in August.



Open Access Policy

MARLOG journal provides immediate open access to all content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. MARLOG journal grants usage rights to others using the open license CC-BY-NC allowing for immediate free access to the work and permitting any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose.


Publishing Ethics

MARLOG Journal Statement on Publication Ethics

MARLOG Journal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and to supporting ethical research practices. 

MARLOG Journal adheres to follow the Committee on Publication Ethics “COPE” Code of Conduct for Journal Editors

MARLOG Journal would like to refer reviewers to the Committee on Publication Ethics “COPE” Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

MARLOG Journal would also encourage authors to refer to the Committee on Publication Ethics "COPE" website

The essentials of MARLOG Journal’s publishing ethics for all groups involved in the publishing process are as follows:


Ethics guidelines for editors

  • The editors have to declare that by joining the editorial board there is no conflict of interest with any other institutes or journals.
  • The editors should maintain the transparency of the academic research & record, preclude professional needs from cooperating ethical standards, and always be willing to publish retractions, rectifications, and erratum when required. 
  • The editors should attempt to ensure timely peer review and publication process and should avoid unnecessary delays. 
  • The editors and other editorial board members should not be involved in editorial decisions on their own submitted work. They should be excluded from publication decisions when they are authors or even have contributed to a manuscript. 
  • The editors should give peer reviewers explicit guidance on their role and responsibilities and monitor their performances for quality and timeliness. 
  • The editor should ensure confidential handling of the submitted manuscripts and not disclose any information on submitted manuscripts before their publication.
  • The editors should assess manuscripts for their scientific quality content, in an unbiased manner and free from any decisions based on discrimination of race, gender, geographical origin, or religion of the author(s). The editor should evaluate manuscripts regarding to their academic merit free of any self-interests. 
  • Promoting research rectitude must be preserved. If at any stage the publisher suspects any kind of misconduct in research, it should be investigated promptly in detail with suitable authority; and if any suspicious act of misconduct is observed in the peer review, it should be resolved with diligence. 

Ethics guidelines for reviewers

  • Peer reviewers should provide a detailed, constructive, comprehensive, evidenced, and unbiased evaluation in a timely manner on the scientific content of the submitted work. They should judge each manuscript on its merits, without regard to race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, academic degree or institutional affiliation of the author(s). 
  • Peer reviewers should play an important role in identifying any ethical concerns or misconduct in their evaluation of submitted manuscripts; such as possible data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, image manipulation, any violation of ethical treatment of animal or human subjects, unethical research, redundant or duplicate publication, conflict of interests and notify the journal editor as the possibility of such problems exists. 
  • Peer reviewers should notify the journal editor about any financial or personal conflict of interest and declining to review the manuscript when a possibility of such a conflict exists. 
  • Peer reviewers have to declare any conflict of interest with any other institutes or journals.
  • Peer reviewers should respect the confidentiality of the complete review process. 
  • Peer reviewers should indicate whether the writing is relevant, concise & clear and evaluating the originality and scientific accuracy.
  • Peer reviewers must avoid making statements in their report which might affect any person’s reputation. 
  • Peer reviewers are required to only agree to peer review manuscripts within their expertise and within a reasonable timeframe. 
  • Peer reviewers should notify the journal editor in the case of declining the review in any case. 
  • Peer reviewers are required to destroy submitted manuscripts and all related material after they have reviewed them.

Ethics guidelines for authors 

  • Authors should make publicly available all the results of their research and are accountable for the completeness and accuracy of their reports. 
  • Author(s) should warrant that the submitted manuscript is from their own original work, which does not infringe the intellectual property rights of any other person or entity, and it is free from any kind of plagiarism including their own previously published work. 
  • All authors named on the paper are equally held accountable for the content of a submitted manuscript or published paper although having different contributions. 
  • The work should not have been published elsewhere or submitted to any other journal(s) at the same time. 
  • Author(s) must clearly declare any potential conflict of interest. 
  • Author(s) must disclose all sources of funding for the research reported in the paper. 
  • If asked to provide a list of suggested reviewers, author(s) must provide the correct details for suitable reviewers with the appropriate experience to review, ensuring that the suggested reviewers do not have a conflict of interest.
  • Proper acknowledgements to other work reported (individual/company/institution) must be given. Permission must be obtained from any content used from other sources.

Post-publication discussions policy

  • MARLOG Journal accepts any comment, and critiques from the readers by sending an email to the editor-in-chief.
  • Editorial team of each journal is committed to collect all comments and criticisms related to each article and send to the author.
  • Authors are committed to response the readers within 4 weeks.

Retraction policy

Articles can be retracted in the following cases:

  • A certain plagiarism is detected.
  • It reports unethical research
  • There’s clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of major error (eg, miscalculation or experimental error), or as a result of fabrication (eg, of data) or falsification (eg, image manipulation)
  • The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (ie, cases of redundant publication)
  • It contains material or data without authorization for use
  • Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue (eg, libel, privacy)
  • The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (a.k.a. conflict of interest) that, in the view of the editor, would have unduly affected interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers.

Complaints and appeals policy

  • MARLOG Journal welcomes any complaints against itself as a journal, members of the editorial boards, and staff of RESD or any journal published by APC.
  • Any complaints from any parties can be composed directly to Prof. Dr. Yasser Gaber (ygd@aast.edu) the Dean of research, and manager of Academy Publishing Centre (APC)
  • MARLOG Journal is committed to deal with any complaints or appeals seriously, and give a response within two weeks of the receipt.

Research misconduct policy

MARLOG Journal allows reporting of research misconduct a published article or a manuscript under peer-review process. The following procedures can be followed for complaints of author misconduct:

  1. The editorial board of each journal receives a complaint that an article submitted to or published in the journal is suspected of containing research misconduct.
  2. The complainant needs to indicate clearly and directly the specific manner and details of misconduct
  3. The editorial board will conduct an investigation, during which time the editor of the journal and the corresponding author(s) of the suspected article will be in contact.
  4. The corresponding author(s) will be asked to provide an interpretations and any available evidence.
  5. If the author(s) of the suspected article accepts the misconduct complaint, the editorial board will take an action depending on the status of the article:
    1. If the article has been published, retraction may be necessary to remedy the situation.
    2. If the misconduct is reported during the review process, the review process may continue, with the author(s) making the relevant changes.
    3. If there’s no response from the author (s) or an unsatisfactory explanation, the article may be permanently retracted or rejected.
  6. The complainant will be informed of the outcome once the issue is resolved. 

MARLOG Journal Advertising policy

MARLOG Journal does not accept advertising and sponsorship for its website and social media accounts.



Digital Object Identifier, DOI of the MARLOG Journal

Digital Object Identifier

The MARLOG Journal is supported by Digital Object Identifier, DOI for each article from Cross Ref as listed in HERE.

The Code of the DOI of each article consists of the following format:



10.21622       = Journal Identifier

MARLOG           = Journal name

YYYY            = Four digits for the year

VV               = Two digits for the Volume Number 

PPP              = Three digits for the Number of the first page of the article


To look for the paper on line, search for this link